Inquisitor Fox Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 NOTE: With the release of Codex: Grey Knights in April 2011, it should go without saying that both versions of Codex: Daemonhunters -- print and PDF -- are invalidated. Alright, for the last week there has been a lot of commenting on the PDF update files. No one was really happy with them, but they are what they are. GW has commented on their website, as pointed out by boreas here. Here is the direct quote, and a link to the page on GW's site where it is located, here. We recently made the Witch Hunters and Daemonhunters codexes available to download as PDFs. Since then, we've received a spate of emails asking questions about the difference between the PDFs and the original, printed copies. Rather than reply to you all individually, I thought I'd try to answer your questions here. Firstly, the rules for allied Space Marines and Inducted Imperial Guard were originally written to reference books that have since gone out of print, so we streamlined the rules required to allow players to collect an army of Daemonhunters or Witch Hunters. The Daemonhunters army list uses the Standard Force Organisation chart, which you'll find on page 87 of the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook. The other point that seems to be causing the most confusion is whether or not the PDF versions supersede the printed versions. They don't: you should feel free to continue to use whatever resources you have available to play your games with; the PDF does not overrule or invalidate the printed Codex book. Yes, this may mean that you and your opponent are using what are essentially different army lists for the same army but not every Inquisition force will comprise of the same elements (highly specialised and secretive forces that they are). And if you'd rather use the same one as your opponent, why not simply decide which version you collectively want to use and share the rules between one another? As for tournaments and gaming events, it's entirely up to the organisers to decide which version to use; it is after all their event. This is the official stance on the matter, this comment by GW clears up all the issues, and I will be systematically going and closing the various topics that have sprung up about this. I see no reason for further commenting about the issue as it doesn't change the current state of things. We have the Codices we have right now, and we will have to wait patiently until it is our own times to shine with the "new Codex" when they come out. I now return you to your regularly scheduled B&C activity. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/205390-the-final-word-on-the-pdfs/ Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 Cool! Good of GW to officially comment on this! :) you should feel free to continue to use whatever resources you have available to play your games with Deathwatch rules are ok to use then! ;) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/205390-the-final-word-on-the-pdfs/#findComment-2450106 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oiad Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 Nah, nah this can't be right. A day when common sense and the liberty of choice in the name of fun truly prevail over RAW nazism? Hell must be freezing over!.. Top stuff. And thank you for having the decency to shut down the torrent of threads surrounding the subject Inquisitor Lady Person. EDIT - Grammar Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/205390-the-final-word-on-the-pdfs/#findComment-2450159 Share on other sites More sharing options...
number6 Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 Excellent find, INP. And thank you. :( Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/205390-the-final-word-on-the-pdfs/#findComment-2450160 Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmk17 Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 And Lo, there was such a lamenting that it doth reached the towers of the regents in Nottingham... And to make certain you check out the link, they also reference the new Nids and Blood Angels FAQ's in that article. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/205390-the-final-word-on-the-pdfs/#findComment-2450512 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozybonza Posted July 2, 2010 Share Posted July 2, 2010 But what are all the people who spent their lives whinging about GW's approach to the PDFs on forums going to do with their lives now? Won't somebody think of the children!?!?!?!? Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/205390-the-final-word-on-the-pdfs/#findComment-2451486 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Thane Posted July 4, 2010 Share Posted July 4, 2010 Amusingly I'm surprised of the rather 'swift' response. Not exactly one that makes choices but not unsatisfactory either. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/205390-the-final-word-on-the-pdfs/#findComment-2453439 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Mel Posted July 5, 2010 Share Posted July 5, 2010 I would like to point out that GW has two different versions for both DH and WH online DH: Old Newer WH Old Newer For Dh the newer version added an underscore to the URL, for WH it was removed. With the DH dex the entire special rules page is removed, for WH the textbox on pg 16 regarding induction is removed. EDIT: I see that in the case of WH both now have the latest version of pg 16 Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/205390-the-final-word-on-the-pdfs/#findComment-2454076 Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmouredWing Posted July 8, 2010 Share Posted July 8, 2010 Alas, though GW is effectively saying 'anything goes' when it comes to the ToS it's a case of 'The PDF trumps Codex'. So, no allies as available in the tournie, pure and simple. Good ol' GW. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/205390-the-final-word-on-the-pdfs/#findComment-2456808 Share on other sites More sharing options...
number6 Posted July 8, 2010 Share Posted July 8, 2010 Oh for :) sake! They can't state that everything is hunky-dory, sorry about the confusion, continue to use your print codexes... ... and then turn right around in about a week and deny the print codexes for their own tournaments!! Seriously, GW. This is hurtful, mean-spirited, dismissive, and asinine. :) Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/205390-the-final-word-on-the-pdfs/#findComment-2457105 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inquisitor Fox Posted July 8, 2010 Author Share Posted July 8, 2010 I think it was a judgement call to ensure that everyone is using the same copy of the rules, and the fair thing would be to make sure everyone has the same copy that is currently available so everyone can be using the same "book" for those armies, as well as ixnaying the allies potential abuses. That being said, it is kind of ironic coming right after their other statement :) Hopefully our new Codices will continue to come out fairly soon-ish (on GW time that is). Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/205390-the-final-word-on-the-pdfs/#findComment-2457117 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk Posted July 8, 2010 Share Posted July 8, 2010 Where does it say internet trumps paper? I've seen no such official statement, other than what's on their website and copied above. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/205390-the-final-word-on-the-pdfs/#findComment-2457187 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hellios Posted July 8, 2010 Share Posted July 8, 2010 Where does it say internet trumps paper? I've seen no such official statement, other than what's on their website and copied above. Well I've never bothered checking but do codices state that they trump the previous one or do we all assume that the new codex is the valid one and that if they make multiple prints (with corrections) of the same codex that the latest one is generally the correct one and the one that should be used? Using the logic that runs this train the latest publication is the official one...Now they have said any resources are fine to use... but that means I can field squats without a problem... and they have said both are valid and figure it out with your opponent... which means and you may not want to play people who do this but they may not allow you to use the codex and in tournies it is all up to the organisers.... and as few WH/DH appear in events they may rather stop the allies rule being abused than keep things nice for the real I players... Basically we now have two conflicting sets of rules... and neither has been given authority over the other apparently... Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/205390-the-final-word-on-the-pdfs/#findComment-2457203 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inquisitor Fox Posted July 8, 2010 Author Share Posted July 8, 2010 Sorry, we were referring to ToS rules available in PDF which came up in the discussion in the thread ToS & the Inquisition here in the OI. It stated that the WH and DH Codices were ok, but just the online PDF version. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/205390-the-final-word-on-the-pdfs/#findComment-2457308 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk Posted July 8, 2010 Share Posted July 8, 2010 Ah, so one Tournament Organizer decided to only use the PDF codexes. I don't see how this is a sweeping thing across all tournaments, despite the Throne of Skulls being a GW thing. It doesn't invalidate the "Official GW stance" at all, so I don't see a need to be frazzled. Friendly allows both variants, tournaments are up to the TO's, exactly as stated. Nothing's changed so far as I'm concerned :D. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/205390-the-final-word-on-the-pdfs/#findComment-2457346 Share on other sites More sharing options...
daboarder Posted July 8, 2010 Share Posted July 8, 2010 OMG! what is GW smoking? Well I for one can say that in OZ the paper is still taking precedence, or atleast for the upcomming lords of terra. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/205390-the-final-word-on-the-pdfs/#findComment-2457537 Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmouredWing Posted July 9, 2010 Share Posted July 9, 2010 Ah, so one Tournament Organizer decided to only use the PDF codexes. I don't see how this is a sweeping thing across all tournaments, despite the Throne of Skulls being a GW thing. It doesn't invalidate the "Official GW stance" at all, so I don't see a need to be frazzled. Friendly allows both variants, tournaments are up to the TO's, exactly as stated. Nothing's changed so far as I'm concerned :).Nothing's changed in terms of friendlies, that is true, but it does AGAIN highlight how GW fail to adequately assess the content of the material before they publish (like I'm saying that with any element of surprise!). As such it could affect those who are planning to enter the ToS but are not fully aware that these PDF's or the additional ToS rules have been released. There won't be many, if any, but there is the potential for some to turn up with an =][= list + allies only to be turned away because their roster is in effect tournie illegal. Link to comment https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/205390-the-final-word-on-the-pdfs/#findComment-2458000 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.